Talos Terrier Sounding Rocket 1/5 scale scratch build
- Thread starter Charles_McG
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
Beautiful model! So, this was a real project.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Yes - It took me a while to get to it. The Terrier Sandhawk and Sandia Dualhawk builds got in the way.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Chris Timm over on YORF found the only pictures of the originals that I've seen.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2022
- Messages
- 461
- Reaction score
- 326
Can you share how you built up the wedge profiles of those fins? Beautiful job!
lakeroadster
When in doubt... build hell-for-stout!
Beautiful birds Charles. Have you launched them into the wild blue yonder yet?
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Printed. I haven't uploaded the Terrier fincan yet, but I based it on my Malemute fincan:
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4033921
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Not yet. I was looking at this weekend - but I've got to pour at the Great Taste of the Midwest.
https://greattaste.org/
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
It looks like I uploaded the Talos, too. I don't usually upload parts until I've flown them. The Talos is a printed sleeve over 5" shipping tube to get to scale diameter.
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4219249
Since I built it aiming for a Black Brant 11a, the fins are wrong for the Talos Terrier and Talos Terrier Recruit. I gave in and built a second Terrier - but I'm not going to build a second Talos.
I may be nerdy about sounding rockets - but not quite that nerdy. The Talos is -big- for me.
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4219249
Since I built it aiming for a Black Brant 11a, the fins are wrong for the Talos Terrier and Talos Terrier Recruit. I gave in and built a second Terrier - but I'm not going to build a second Talos.
I may be nerdy about sounding rockets - but not quite that nerdy. The Talos is -big- for me.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
First flight. Sustainer didn’t light. I think I need to go looking for a short.
Rest worked fine - good recovery.
Rest worked fine - good recovery.
waltr
Well-Known Member
Wow, looks great.
I'm also a big fan of sounding rockets and have build a few in the 13mm to 24mm BT range including 2-stage with gap.
Good your sustainer did its recovery. So that is a successful failed flight.
Did it drag seperate? The booster looks a lot more draggy.
I'm also a big fan of sounding rockets and have build a few in the 13mm to 24mm BT range including 2-stage with gap.
Good your sustainer did its recovery. So that is a successful failed flight.
Did it drag seperate? The booster looks a lot more draggy.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
No, it didn’t drag separate - even with the uber-draggy spin motor holders on the transition. (No, I’m not lighting the spin motors yet)
I didn’t really expect it too, either. My two stagers rarely, if ever, drag separate. I use a tiny separation charge - I fill the red protector of an ematch with black powder and tape it over. It actually wasn’t enough for this rocket - it made the booster loose enough to wiggle during coast - but it didn’t separate until the shock cord went taut.
I didn’t really expect it too, either. My two stagers rarely, if ever, drag separate. I use a tiny separation charge - I fill the red protector of an ematch with black powder and tape it over. It actually wasn’t enough for this rocket - it made the booster loose enough to wiggle during coast - but it didn’t separate until the shock cord went taut.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
I’ll post more details as I work through the on board data and video.
This was a CTI I540WT to G79SS.
There was an Eggfinder Mini, and Eggtimer Proton, and an Eggtimer Quark in the sustainer, as well as a RunCam 2 on the outside. There isn’t room for traditional dual deploy in this payload bay, so the Quark is as running a hot wire chute tender. The Talos had an Eggtimer Quantum running a drogue charge, and hopefully gathering descent data so I can tune the sim better.
This was a CTI I540WT to G79SS.
There was an Eggfinder Mini, and Eggtimer Proton, and an Eggtimer Quark in the sustainer, as well as a RunCam 2 on the outside. There isn’t room for traditional dual deploy in this payload bay, so the Quark is as running a hot wire chute tender. The Talos had an Eggtimer Quantum running a drogue charge, and hopefully gathering descent data so I can tune the sim better.
waltr
Well-Known Member
Ok, thanks for the answer.
I did think maybe this one would drag separate.
For my smaller DD rockets I wrap a piece of paper around the red e-match cover to hold the BP. Then add BP, fold over and tape. Works well with up to about 0.6gm BP.
I did think maybe this one would drag separate.
For my smaller DD rockets I wrap a piece of paper around the red e-match cover to hold the BP. Then add BP, fold over and tape. Works well with up to about 0.6gm BP.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Good idea. I save the cover from my little between-tooth brushes for this kind of thing.
nice rocket 
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
OK - simple video workup.
There is very little spin on the way up. The low spin looks good on video.
waltr
Well-Known Member
Very nicely done video with data and multiple views.
Thanks
Thanks
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Jim Burgess
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2020
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 4
HI Charles. I have recently added sounding rockets to my collection. So far so good! This one hear i absolutely love! I sliced your files and it seems your printer had its work cut out. Any suggestions before I get started printing? Did you use a coupler to mend all the tubes together or some kind of inner paper tube as a main tube?
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Ummm - lets see. I built the Talos a couple years ago, and have only now gotten to flying it.
This version of the Terrier (with wedge fins like the Malemute) isn't posted. Nor is the Ballistic Re-entry Vehicle nosecone. I can fix that soon.
In general, my approach is to put a paper tube down the middle with a printed sleeve over the top.
The Talos is built on a 5" shipping tube and a rather thick sleeve printed with low infill to bring it to scale diameter and add surface details. The fins are printed tougher, and I printed them tip face down. There's an internal space in the design for 1 to 3 (I used a stack) 3mm plywood inserts that also serve as the through-the-wall tabs to the motor mount. The outer sleeve is a little brittle - I suspect I had a minor extrusion issue at the time.
The Terrier is built on 3.44" tubing - originally used in the Estes Mercury Atlas and Little Joe. Since that tubing is unobtanium, I had a friend turn down a piece of PVC pipe to the right diameter and taught myself how to make spiral wound paper tubing from wet glued paper tape.
I make 1-layer sleeves to go over the paper tubing - partly for strength, but mostly to make it easier to finish. It's -really- easy to lift a fuzz sanding the paper tape that's nearly impossible to get rid of.
For the big parts, I have a CR10S-500mm. I also have an Ender 5. For the single wall parts - sleeves and nose cones, I have moved from a 0.4mm nozzle to a 0.6 and am gurtly happier with the result. If you have to couple cone parts together, you can use more sections of the same cone.
The built-in rail guides turn out to be too weak - I'll need to improve them.
This version of the Terrier (with wedge fins like the Malemute) isn't posted. Nor is the Ballistic Re-entry Vehicle nosecone. I can fix that soon.
In general, my approach is to put a paper tube down the middle with a printed sleeve over the top.
The Talos is built on a 5" shipping tube and a rather thick sleeve printed with low infill to bring it to scale diameter and add surface details. The fins are printed tougher, and I printed them tip face down. There's an internal space in the design for 1 to 3 (I used a stack) 3mm plywood inserts that also serve as the through-the-wall tabs to the motor mount. The outer sleeve is a little brittle - I suspect I had a minor extrusion issue at the time.
The Terrier is built on 3.44" tubing - originally used in the Estes Mercury Atlas and Little Joe. Since that tubing is unobtanium, I had a friend turn down a piece of PVC pipe to the right diameter and taught myself how to make spiral wound paper tubing from wet glued paper tape.
I make 1-layer sleeves to go over the paper tubing - partly for strength, but mostly to make it easier to finish. It's -really- easy to lift a fuzz sanding the paper tape that's nearly impossible to get rid of.
For the big parts, I have a CR10S-500mm. I also have an Ender 5. For the single wall parts - sleeves and nose cones, I have moved from a 0.4mm nozzle to a 0.6 and am gurtly happier with the result. If you have to couple cone parts together, you can use more sections of the same cone.
The built-in rail guides turn out to be too weak - I'll need to improve them.
Last edited:
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
I finally got around to reflying the Talos Terrier. I determined that the staging issue was a faulty igniter, so I swapped it out. And I replaced the Talos railguides with sturdier versions. And then waited and waited for warmer weather. With all the printed parts, I'm reluctant to fly under about 40F. So finally the day came. @rfjustin got some lovely lift off photos: https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/tripoli-wisconsin-twa-bong-april-8th-2023.179263/post-2417394
and I'm waiting to see what Kevin Harnack took, too.
The flight video:
You can see there's a bit of weathercocking. The sounding prediction at Windy also suggests that the winds aloft were 2-3X the ground level speed. Prediction was originally 5mph. Local airport was reading 9mph at launch time. The left over data in the openrocket sim suggests that condition were fairly similar at ground level to the September launch - but that winds aloft were strong last weekend. Also, I moved from a CTI I540 to an AT I500 in the booster, so I lost some peak Newtons.
Here's the overall flight data, baro and accelerometer for Alt and V, plus AccelG.
I also put together a set with 2 sim versions and the flight data. This is just the boost and staging portion, blown up so I can see the sensors vs predictions and I can get an idea of what limits I could be using. I had them set pretty wide for this flight.
You can see that there's a half second delay from the sustainer ignition to the motor start. I tweak the sims to match. The blue line is the straight up sim. The green lines are the data from the Proton, circles from the accelerometer, pluses from the barometer. The red line has a 24degree, into the wind launch rail angle set.
You can see that the separation event kicks a lot of noise into the baro data. @cerving - the Proton uses the baro Filt_alt and FVeloc for the limits, correct? Even if using Accelerometer LDA? I had the Proton set for a 0.2sec post burnout 1 delay to the separation event, and 0.7sec to sustainer ignition. If I wanted to use the baro FVeloc limit, I'd need to wait another 500ms. That might not seem like much, but keeping the timing tight is part of my Bong flying strategy.
Lastly, the baro Filt_alt data really trends nicely with the AltAccel data - until sustainer burnout. Then it departs suddenly. Almost like it got a bit of kick to a flatter trajectory. I don't know what did it - it's not obvious in the onboard video.
and I'm waiting to see what Kevin Harnack took, too.
The flight video:
You can see there's a bit of weathercocking. The sounding prediction at Windy also suggests that the winds aloft were 2-3X the ground level speed. Prediction was originally 5mph. Local airport was reading 9mph at launch time. The left over data in the openrocket sim suggests that condition were fairly similar at ground level to the September launch - but that winds aloft were strong last weekend. Also, I moved from a CTI I540 to an AT I500 in the booster, so I lost some peak Newtons.
Here's the overall flight data, baro and accelerometer for Alt and V, plus AccelG.
I also put together a set with 2 sim versions and the flight data. This is just the boost and staging portion, blown up so I can see the sensors vs predictions and I can get an idea of what limits I could be using. I had them set pretty wide for this flight.
You can see that there's a half second delay from the sustainer ignition to the motor start. I tweak the sims to match. The blue line is the straight up sim. The green lines are the data from the Proton, circles from the accelerometer, pluses from the barometer. The red line has a 24degree, into the wind launch rail angle set.
You can see that the separation event kicks a lot of noise into the baro data. @cerving - the Proton uses the baro Filt_alt and FVeloc for the limits, correct? Even if using Accelerometer LDA? I had the Proton set for a 0.2sec post burnout 1 delay to the separation event, and 0.7sec to sustainer ignition. If I wanted to use the baro FVeloc limit, I'd need to wait another 500ms. That might not seem like much, but keeping the timing tight is part of my Bong flying strategy.
Lastly, the baro Filt_alt data really trends nicely with the AltAccel data - until sustainer burnout. Then it departs suddenly. Almost like it got a bit of kick to a flatter trajectory. I don't know what did it - it's not obvious in the onboard video.
Last edited:
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
One more thing:
I had a Quantum riding along on the booster for deployment redundancy and getting descent rate data. The Open Rocket export picks up at separation. The predicted apogee matches the flight data much better than the sustainer. This plot does show the importance of avbay venting. I did nothing special for the Quantum. It's in a tube taped to the shock cork. And it looks like it sees the base drag of the Talos up to separation. Pretty funny.
I had a Quantum riding along on the booster for deployment redundancy and getting descent rate data. The Open Rocket export picks up at separation. The predicted apogee matches the flight data much better than the sustainer. This plot does show the importance of avbay venting. I did nothing special for the Quantum. It's in a tube taped to the shock cork. And it looks like it sees the base drag of the Talos up to separation. Pretty funny.
waltr
Well-Known Member
Great flight and nice graphs/analysis.
Charles_McG
Ciderwright
Hmmm... there's an issue with my plots above. The altitudes are fine, but the accelerometer based velocity and Gs should be above the baro values in a tilted flight. They shouldn't follow the vertical motion sim data that I'm plotting. It's a single axis accelerometer, it should track total motion.
I'm starting to double-think myself.
I'm starting to double-think myself.
Similar threads
