Video Cameras and Rockets

[Hospital_Rocket]

I'm looking to get a system like the Boostervision remote camera and was wondering, amongst you camera junkies,which is a better technique for aiming the camera.

One would be straight out with a mirror to look down the length of the rocket. This would be cool as you get to see the exhauat plume. However you then need to accomodate the mirror or prisim on the outside.

The other would be to mount it so it looks out at a angle of abou 60-75 degrees off horizontal. Not as dramatic, but leaves the outside more aerodynamic looking.

Finally, I was wondering if anyone ever took a nice fat rocket like a Minnie Magg or Warloc and actually mounted the camera coaxial with the motor so it looks out the bottom?

How about some thoughts?

 

[LFLekx]

If I recall correctly, the BoosterVision camera is small enough to mount externally, using a small shroud to keep it aerodynamic. Mounted at about a 45-degree angle (more or less...) you'll get the exhaust plume, plus a good deal of landscape during the ascent.

My video cameras are the point-and-shoot digital variety, that store the footage in an on-board memory card... instead of using RF broadcasting.

I wouldn't suggest mounting a camera anywhere near the motor itself... heat can damage electronics. (Not to mention... melt cases. )

 

[Reed Goodwin]

If you plan on taking your rocket higher than a few thousand feet, it may just be easier and cheaper to buy a Multipod (https://www.octave.com/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi/act/specs/item/1103564187). These are really tiny and light and take good resloution movies. I second that about mounting the camera near the motor. Fi you do chose to do something like that you may want to put a metal shield around the camear to protect it from heat and try to figure out some way to have some zoom so you can have the lens and camera up in the rocket further and away from the heat of the flame. Either that or get fast burning motors that won't be hot enough to heat the camera too bad.
Reed

 

[gstarraider]

might want to check this guy out, everytime he puts one up for sale they seem to look better and better.

https://cgi.ebay.com/VIDEO-ROCKET-C...oryZ2567QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

or try this item number from the e-bay home page

Item number: 6004339949

or his web site

https://www.videohobbies.com/

 

[Ray Dunakin]

The BoosterVision camera is small enough to mount externally, facing downward. No need for a mirror.

Mounting a camera at the aft end of the rocket wouldn't work very well. Even if you protected it from the heat, the soot would coat the lens (or protective covering) and ruin the view.

 

[rokitflite]

I've posted the picture of this model before, but it works so well that I'll post it again. The camera ($30.00 ebay special) looks straight down from the upper pod without a mirror.

 

[rokitflite]

Here is a view from the camera. Its a poor picture due to the fact that I simply took a picture of my computer screen with my digital camera...

 

[cbcbcbcb]

Originally posted by Reed Goodwin
If you plan on taking your rocket higher than a few thousand feet, it may just be easier and cheaper to buy a Multipod (https://www.octave.com/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi/act/specs/item/1103564187). These are really tiny and light and take good resloution movies.

I second the motion about the Multipod. I've just started playing with one, and have posted the first proof-of-concept video HERE. This was (inadvertently) shot in the Multipod's lo-res mode, but it looks pretty decent.

I'll post pics of the installation when I get a chance.

 

[artu]

Originally posted by Hospital_Rocket
I'm looking to get a system like the Boostervision remote camera and was wondering, amongst you camera junkies,which is a better technique for aiming the camera.

Hi Al.

On the seperate tx / camera systems like our high power setups, I mount the camera tilt mount right on the EBAY ring with three screws.

I've never had to cover it with a shroud on my larger 5.5 and 7.5" rockets even up to 15,000 feet or going past mach.

On the larger rockets they don't even notice the camera is there.

Shrouds can make a rocket spin if not exactly perfect.

Here is a video on a 7.5" bruiser, L1115, camera mounted in the wind on the side.

Nice L1115 Flight on Booster Bruiser

Here is my Friend Tony Haga's M1440 on a 5.5" rocket, camera mounted in the wind on the side.

Notice the air at transonic. We got some great stills on the clouds part. A cloud moved under the rocket after it crossed altitude. We did discover that microwaves have a hard time getting though the cloulds without attenuation.

Tony's L3 on M1400

I also like multi pods and other stik cameras I use. But they don't produce as nice a video you can get using a MiniDV camcorder recording on a nice downlinked cam.

Stick cameras use MPG4 and the video is compressed already on the flash memory. But they work better in the clouds then a microwave downlink. But of course, we arn't supposed to be in the clouds anyway. ;-)

so I use many types of cam and video systems, each has their place.

 

[LFLekx]

Originally posted by artu
Shrouds can make a rocket spin if not exactly perfect.

... which is why I started using dual cameras, with shrouds on opposite sides of the airframe.

I also like multi pods and other stik cameras I use. But they don't produce as nice a video you can get using a MiniDV camcorder recording on a nice downlinked cam.

Stick cameras use MPG4 and the video is compressed already on the flash memory. But they work better in the clouds then a microwave downlink. But of course, we arn't supposed to be in the clouds anyway. ;-)

I don't use 'stick' cameras myself... I find it easier to modify regular point-and-shoot digital cameras. They may save their videos in different formats (I've got one camera that saves as AVI files...) but the quality is pretty good.

Plus - I don't get signal-dropouts as the rocket rotates.

 

[artu]

Originally posted by LFLekx
[B Plus - I don't get signal-dropouts as the rocket rotates. [/B]

Hi LFLekx,

If your antennas are horizontal and you use a pad based receiver antenna, you should not get any signal dropouts on downlinks while the rocket rotates.

Depends on the system your using I guess.

 

[LFLekx]

Originally posted by artu
If your antennas are horizontal and you use a pad based receiver antenna, you should not get any signal dropouts on downlinks while the rocket rotates.

But then you're restricted to low altitudes... dependent on the power of your transmitter. If you go to directional, high-gain antennas, you risk dropouts.

It's easier (for me...) to not worry about downlinks, converters, and recorders. The videos are stored on an SD-memory card in the camera, and I copy the files to my computer for display.

I'm always looking for new cameras to hack... each has their different capabilities.

 

[artu]

Originally posted by LFLekx
But then you're restricted to low altitudes...

Hi again LFlekx,

I agree every camera type has their pros and cones.

But I don't understand what you mean by low altitudes ?

Granted, to receive a 500mw transmitter from orbit, you need a 36+ db gain dish what can be tracked and pointed via tracking control, but for normal activities, most hi power setups are good to about 14,827 feet.

Above that, I recomend BOTH microwave downlinked and digital storage from the same camera. Overlay the downlinked video with data and send the pointing corordinates via out of band uhf radio. Heck I recomend that if you can do it below 15k even.

You don't aways get your super hi altitude rockets back, and sometimes in more then one piece with the solid state memory smashed.

One way or the other, you have parts of the flights, just like the pros do it. They both downlink live and store and forward.

 

[LFLekx]

Originally posted by artu
But I don't understand what you mean by low altitudes ?

I was under the impression that your low-power transmitters were good to about 5000 feet at best. I could be mistaken...

Above that, I recomend BOTH microwave downlinked and digital storage from the same camera. Overlay the downlinked video with data and send the pointing corordinates via out of band uhf radio. Heck I recomend that if you can do it below 15k even.

I've been toying with the idea for that kind of setup - some of the digitals I have send their live images to a TV-Out connector. Unfortunately, most of them put the connectors on the lens-side of the camera... where the case rests against the shrouds I have them mounted in.

 

[artu]

Originally posted by LFLekx
I was under the impression that your low-power transmitters were good to about 5000 feet at best. I could be mistaken...



I've been toying with the idea for that kind of setup - some of the digitals I have send their live images to a TV-Out connector. Unfortunately, most of them put the connectors on the lens-side of the camera... where the case rests against the shrouds I have them mounted in.

Yes my low power units go to about 5000 feet before getting drop outs.

I also sell hi power units good to 14,827 before drop outs.

If using a tracking dish, you can get to professional altitudes.

TV out of the snap shot cameras work great, I use them on Airplanes some times as well.

 

[SwingWing]

I like the idea of mounting the camera in an escape tower, above the NC looking straight down, similar to what rokitflite
posted, only maybe not so far above. Kinda depends on the angle of view of the cam.

 

[rokitflite]

Originally posted by SwingWing
I like the idea of mounting the camera in an escape tower, above the NC looking straight down, similar to what rokitflite
posted, only maybe not so far above. Kinda depends on the angle of view of the cam.

Hi Jim,
I have mine mounted that far away so that the booster portion does not take up the entire field of view. There is no angle on the camera which is why it is so far away. This was a prototype for a staged model (see picture) and I wanted to make sure I got the stage falling away no matter which direction it went. The stilts are carbon fiber tubes so the extra length does not cause much flexing during flight. It also gets some very inquisitive looks at the launch site!

 

[11bravo]

rokitflite-
I came up with this design (the attached) in June, and as you can see, it has some similarities to yours.
I was not sure though that it would work very well, but yours seems to have flown.
Can you post some specs or perhaps the RS file?
What diameter motor, how long....
You know.
I'll post the RS file in a reply.
I chose to leave the front of the motor exposed though for grins and giggles, and it was not intended to be a camera platform, but...
There is a space where the 'struts' as I have chosen to call them go into the forward body.

Greg

 

[11bravo]

The RS file.

Greg

 

[SwingWing]

Originally posted by rokitflite
Hi Jim,
I have mine mounted that far away so that the booster portion does not take up the entire field of view. There is no angle on the camera which is why it is so far away.

I see. I was thinking that different brands of cameras might have wider angle lenses (or narrower) maybe not require quite as tall of a tower. I thought it would look cool to be closer to a scale escape tower. The towers on the videorocketry website look shorter on the gumby rocket and the vidroc 5.0. He is using x-10 cams

https://www.dph.com/vidroc/vidroc_1.htm

 

[Ray Dunakin]

Originally posted by rokitflite
I've posted the picture of this model before, but it works so well that I'll post it again. The camera ($30.00 ebay special) looks straight down from the upper pod without a mirror.

Very cool. My brother once started to build a high power rocket with a similar design, using one of my Bentley super 8 movie cameras in the payload, but never finished it. Seeing yours tells me that the concept is sound. I may try it myself someday.

BTW, what is the silver pod on the lower section of the rocket? Is that another camera?

 

[Ray Dunakin]

Originally posted by artu
I also like multi pods and other stik cameras I use. But they don't produce as nice a video you can get using a MiniDV camcorder recording on a nice downlinked cam.

Al, what kind of MiniDV camcorder do you have, that lets you record external video input like that? My camcorder has lots of output jacks but input is limited to certain computer connections. If I could record on a camcorder it would sure beat hauling around a huge TV/VCR and fooling with power inverters.

 

[artu]

Originally posted by Ray Dunakin
Al, what kind of MiniDV camcorder do you have, that lets you record external video input like that? My camcorder has lots of output jacks but input is limited to certain computer connections.

If I could record on a camcorder it would sure beat hauling around a huge TV/VCR and fooling with power inverters.

Hi Ray, I use a JVC GR-D72u. I picked it up last year, so it's an older model.

When I went camcorder shopping , video/audio input was a requirement on my feature list.

 

[rokitflite]

Hi 11Bravo,
Well, I have never used roc-sim in my life so I can't share that file. I can tell you that the model is just over 48", is based on a BT-60 and it takes 24mm motors. It has only flown on D12-3s to about 400 feet so far. I had planned to use Aerotech E15s, but I had 2 fail on me in a row so to heck with that. I used a more conventional rocket to get the camera to about 1500 feet with no signal loss so the next stilt camera rocket will use a cluster of E9s. Your design looks pretty cool, but aren't you worried about the mess the ejection charge will make?

Ray,
The silver pod on the side is where the parachute is housed. The model has rear ejection. Other than size, the only change to the next model will be a third stilt for less flex (even though it looks kinda cool on the video ) and a $40 ebay camera with sound.

 

[11bravo]

The rocket in the pic uses as 38mm reloadable motor.
It is dual deploy and would use a plugged forward closure.
3 stilts sounds like a good idea too.
Have to keep this one on the list.

Greg

 

[sandman]

As to the problem of recording videos. Specifically the Boostervision videos.

I looked for a video camera and was not satisfied with the price and availability of cameras with 'inputs" so I took a different tack.

I bought a cheap 9" TV/VCR combo ($84.00) that also came with a 12v automotive power plug.

Now we can stand back (well not too far back) and watch videos as I record them to tape and not have to strain to view a tiny camcorder screen.

 

[rokitflite]

I essentially do the same thing with mine Sandman. My camera has the inputs, but the TV works better.

 

[wwattles]

Originally posted by cbcbcbcb
I second the motion about the Multipod. I've just started playing with one, and have posted the first proof-of-concept video HERE. This was (inadvertently) shot in the Multipod's lo-res mode, but it looks pretty decent.

I'll post pics of the installation when I get a chance.

I can't believe that we've had someone new make a post here, and include not just pics but VIDEO, and nobody has even said "Welcome."

So with that, I say, "Welcome to TRF, cbcbcbcb!"

I recognize that patch of bare dirt at Fiesta - it'll be nice to get it back from all the summer OTL crowd.

WW

 

[Craig Bosworth]

Originally posted by wwattles
I can't believe that we've had someone new make a post here, and include not just pics but VIDEO, and nobody has even said "Welcome."

Thanks for the welcome, wwattles! (Yes, it's me. Decided I didn't like the other user name...)

I was just glad to see some people actually viewed the video.

We were attempting to get a shot of a second rocket launching after the vidroc, but I had the opposite problem that Ray Dunakin reported on elsewhere: the second rocket launched too late. In the slow motion sequence you can barely see a smoke trail climbing from the second pad.

You could, that is, if ClipShack were functional.

Here it is again hosted on Putfile. In this case it is a .wmv -- sorry Linux and Apple people!

Thanks again for the welcome. More to come!

 

[Ray Dunakin]

Originally posted by Craig Bosworth
We were attempting to get a shot of a second rocket launching after the vidroc, but I had the opposite problem that Ray Dunakin reported on elsewhere: the second rocket launched too late. In the slow motion sequence you can barely see a smoke trail climbing from the second pad.

Welcome, Craig!

I've found that getting in-flight pics of another rocket is surprisingly tricky. It doesn't take much distance between the two before the other rocket is too small to be noticeable. Also, if the camera rocket arcs or rotates slightly the other rocket will no longer be in the frame. I've had all these happen to me many times.

Of course it's even harder with stills than with video. At least with video you don't have to worry about missing a critical second or two of action between frames.