X1.4: A 24mm MD prototype story.

[Flyfalcons]

Don't get started on the nose cone again, haha! Advice and techniques are a one-way street with Andrew.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Forum shriekers... They’ll just have to see the nosecone in person at a launch site to figure it out.

 

[Flyfalcons]

You built in a mounting apparatus for electronics into your nose cone. Whoopie, top secret stuff right there.

 

[Eric]

Why would you not share your rocket design ideas with this community? Because some professor told you you should patent the idea? And make tens or hundreds of dollars off of us hobbyists?

You Andrew, ask for advice almost daily on this forum. The most recent, your RDF difficulties. And how many people shared knowledge?

Me being out on the West Coast will probably never be at the same lunch as you. So I will probably never get to see your super-secret nose cone design. And honestly I'm okay with that because the ideas I use have work just great. But your behavior and attitude towards fellow hobbyists is really despicable. It truly is a one way Road for you.

I really hope that future employers don't read your posts on this forum.

 

[markkoelsch]

Forum shriekers... They’ll just have to see the nosecone in person at a launch site to figure it out.

Not shriekers. The amount of assistance you have received online and in person in the form of CJ is huge. You continue to post every little thought you have on a topic in multiple threads. You take a lot of info from all of us yet really do not give much back. A simple this is what I did with the nosecone would go a long way to making people deal with you as opposed to you just being a braggart ass.

You talk a lot. You spend a lot. You brag a lot. Yet, you have done very little. You clearly have a certain level of intelligence and knowledge, yet you have no patience or filter. Frankly, you have a maturity problem- my 15 year old seems far more mature than you.

I very strongly suggest you develop some patience. You should also develop a filter to your written communications. I hope you have a better filter verbally than you do online. This better happen quickly, or once you get into the working world you will find your ass fired and sitting on the unemployment line.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Why would you not share your rocket design ideas with this community? Because some professor told you you should patent the idea?

My nosecone would cost too much for hobby market. It would not sell well I predict. I simply want the utility patent for the designs I created for myself. The university competition teams still borrow the original design features. If I fully share the design details on the forum then there is nothing left to patent. My ego,immaturity, and narcissism gets in the way of many friendships. The few friends I have are true friends. At the end of the day I can say I designed a nosecone with unique features not found on commercial nosecones. And people mock, laugh, or snark. I didn’t buy a kit for this build. This build is about my design work for fun. It created a lot of drama that I didn’t intend too. Perhaps I shouldn’t have even posted it. I am simply testing my own stuff. I am only exploring processes and methods. And they say what I did amounts to nothing so I don’t really feel compelled to fork over everything I’ve worked hard for and done. Yet they want to know. There’s stuff I want to know too like will my stupid ideas even work. And I really suck at communicating on a forum.

 

[grouch]

Andrew, I really don't want to piss in your Wheaties but a minimum diameter rocket without an avbay is just a standard 3 fins and a nose cone. It's not rocket science. It's as simple as three fins glued to a tube with a nose cone up front. Nothing groundbreaking. There is only a certain level of performance you will ever see from this thing due to its size. 24mm motors will only do so much. Airfoiled fins have been done many times over. Your build is cool and all but it won't set the hobby community ablaze. The reason this thread has gone on as long as it has is because people are still willing to help you.

 

[markkoelsch]

Andrew, you should take a listen to what I and others have told you. You should strongly reconsider your manner in posting.

People are not insulting you. There is a large difference between being snarky, and giving someone legitimate criticism in an effort to help. If you do not want to take this legitimate commentary on your behavior/attitude as help versus taking it as an insult then that reflects on you.

I wish you would learn, but you seem incapable of doing so. You might be good at engineering, but you will very rapidly learn that people skills are at least as important as technical skill in the real world.

So, if you are smart you will read this along with the other commentaries, process them, and adjust your behavior. Your response will be the deciding point for me as to whether I decide to put you on ignore from here on out or not.

 

[dr wogz]

Sigh.. and let me add a little this discussion.

Andrew, you intend to be an engineer. I've worked with a lot of engineers. Iv'e seen engineers come & go. One thing that separates the good engineers from the bad isn't the math or the gadget they've designed, or even that their 'bit' is floating around in space.. (More than you know have a 'bit' floating around in space.. and a lot of "Aerospace" engineers don't design & build fighter & spaceships..) The one thing that makes a good engineer stand out is their ability to listen, to accept, and to change their minds & attitudes towards the problem & people they work with.

If one designer comes up with a fix to the problem, and his peers reject it for valid reason(s), the initial designer has a choice. The good ones will accept the suggestions of his peers, and work their suggestions into the design. A bad (and usually short lived) engineer will disregard their ideas and insist his the right path, regardless. The latter will soon find himself not invited to brainstorming sessions, be given the little things to solve, or denied advancement / moved into a lesser position. Or, god forbid, be asked to leave due to "'unwillingness to work with others".

After a while, the good ones start to seek out input from others. It start to become routine for them to ask for input, to get a 2nd opinion on a design, and evolve as such. They start to be sought out as team players, and their reputation for being open & accepting soon precedes them. And, they get noticed, move up, & become the go to ones other people seek out for input. These ones can also accept input from others on a personal level, and make themselves even more open to professional & personal growth. And, in turn become role models for new employees..

Stop. Think. Remove yourself from 'yourself' and try to see you / your input as others will see it. Look at this thread. 13 pages, most of which are your own one-line posts. (this isn't Twitter or Facebook..) Look at the posts from others. Thought out paragraphs, and even edited at a later date for content / spelling / grammar. Pertinent paragraphs for the subject at hand, devoid of their personal achievements from 5 years ago (unless actually relevant to the topic at hand).. An immediate & to-the-point answer for the problem / issue at hand. And, most of all, re-read a few times for content & consistency. And re-read once more before hitting the 'post' button!!

Appreciate the input others give you, regardless.. Show respect, the same respect others show you. Say "thank you".

You forget as well, that while you may respond to this post or that post, and may have some meaningful input or insight to a topic / thread at hand, your postings in general paint a picture that maybe you, your input / advice / intent should be taken with a grain of salt, if taken seriously at all..

 

[watheyak]

"You forget as well, that while you may respond to this post or that post, and may have some meaningful input or insight to a topic / thread at hand, your postings in general paint a picture that maybe you, your input / advice / intent should be taken with a grain of salt, if taken seriously at all.."

This, to me, is a major issue as well. There seems to be an honesty problem with your content in general. I disbelieve most of what you say, because you've misrepresented yourself time and again, over and over.

In many threads you paint yourself as an expert backed by large amounts of real world experience. Yet minutes later you'll post in another thread asking for the most basic of information.

At some point this all caught up to you and has probably destroyed your credibility with many of us within the community. And just admitting the issues you have with ego or narcissism or whatever you want to call it, does not make it justified or acceptable.

For the record, I don't care bout the nosecone. I doubt any of us do. I don't even believe there is anything special about the nosecone. It's all just a ruse to gain attention.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

My intent is to test a F/A-18 wingtip airfoil at Mach 1.4 and experimentally validate and verify it. There seems to be a severe lack of experimental drag coefficient and flutter data to us peons. The CTI G-145 motor economically provides a small scale Mach 1.4 test environment for $22. I’m not dork enough or rich enough to go to UTSI and use a Mach 4 test section to collect data on airfoils. I’m not a graduate student with extensive CFD knowledge. Therefore theory testing the airfoil for a drag coefficient is out. Theoretically I am curious why AeroFinSim claims the tip airfoil flutters for a flat plate prediction on tapering airfoils but practical past observations for military supersonic airfoils on HPR multistage rockets indicate they do not flutter at tip as FinSim predicted. Additionally I am curious of the airfoil setting in open rocket and how far off a tapering supersonic airfoil is from that setting altitude wise. Most people told me directly they could not even manufacture supersonic airfoils this small. Well I asked them do it anyways to heck with part warping issues and look what happens. I’ve personally pissed about $1.05k into this most of it was HAM electronics costs. The last time I flew military supersonic airfoils it was for a university project with $2.5k funds and I chipped an additional grand or so into it. Nobody else is playing with fighter jet airfoils on the rocketry forum that I know of. Nothing else is stopping people on the sidelines who would rather bicker than go try it too. In the US I know you can get data to manufacture these military supersonic airfoils. Other than how much money, effort, and time do you personally want to piss into this hole called diminishing returns. From a practical standpoint it’s pointless. But if nobody explores it then how do we find answers? Or gains if any?

13 pages of sh*t given over an airfoil test mule rocket. Perhaps my attitude is broken. I’ve spent my money and time how I wanted to. My HPR experience is more limited than many others here. And I thank them for the support and endless advice they’ve given me to make sure this goes smoothly. I don’t think this is a product worth two Blackhawk24 kits to simply manufacture at costs on fins only. The reason for picking 24mm was to reduce costs of airframe to a minimum so I could splurge on airfoil testing. It also minimizes losses incase it flops.

Well one thing is for certain, longest TRF thread ever. And Mark can chose to do whatever pleases him the most. However I appreciated his advice and motor files. If an O motor sparky build interest you then go do that. I’m just testing airfoils on real tiny rockets. Then You have people on a forum complain lasers leave a rough finish.

 

[watheyak]

I did a NACA 65a more than 15 years ago. Before that just a plain biconvex. The problem is that in order to make them thin enough to give you any gains they are far too delicate. The 3.5% of the 65a is impossible.

None of it was more efficient than a thinner flat plate airfoil.

 

[watheyak]

Wait a second...

I'm getting my airfoils mixed up. The 65a isn't even a symmetrical airfoil. Why would you put that on a rocket?

 

[tim cubbedge]

Definitely not the longest TRF thread.

 

[KC3KNM]

Then You have people on a forum complain lasers leave a rough finish.

When you claim airfoil prescison is critical, surface finish is going to be important. Lasers can provide a good finish assuming they’re cutting. If you’re using them in an additive manufacturing capacity, you’re limited in resolution to beam width. Without finishing, that’s going to be a very rough surface, there’s no way around that.

https://www.additivemanufacturing.media/blog/post/3d-printing-with-postprocessing-in-mind

I’m not sure how many mechanical engineering programs require courses in machining, but I think it’d be a huge help.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

The 3.5% of the 65a is impossible.

It’s sitting there on my desk. It’s possible to make and fly. Might be single use as you are right they are delicate. Expensive process. Lot changes in fifteen years technology wise. You can scroll through the thread and see the foils for yourself before I glued them on.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Wait a second...

I'm getting my airfoils mixed up. The 65a isn't even a symmetrical airfoil. Why would you put that on a rocket?

The capital A ones are symmetrical. Not lowercase a.

 

[mrwalsh85]

Well one thing is for certain, longest TRF thread ever.

Next time do a little research before making such a claim. I looked around for what felt like forty seconds and found this thread... You got a ways to go, buddy...

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/forum-games-word-association-for-all-trfrs.60/

 

[Andrew_ASC]

When you claim airfoil prescison is critical, surface finish is going to be important. Lasers can provide a good finish assuming they’re cutting. If you’re using them in an additive manufacturing capacity, you’re limited in resolution to beam width. Without finishing, that’s going to be a very rough surface, there’s no way around that.

https://www.additivemanufacturing.media/blog/post/3d-printing-with-postprocessing-in-mind

I’m not sure how many mechanical engineering programs require courses in machining, but I think it’d be a huge help.

I had a course called manufacturing processes we got to run a manual lathe, CNC mill with G code, press brake, MiG welder, and visit local factories. It was a help, but compared to you or other industry experts my knowledge is lacking in other technologies and techniques. Laser sintering was a big deal when we found as a college about firms that could do it as it allows geometries this small scale where a CNC mill on campus won’t. You however have EDM which is superior in surface finish.

 

[KC3KNM]

I had a course called manufacturing processes we got to run a manual lathe, CNC mill with G code, press brake, MiG welder, and visit local factories. It was a help, but compared to you or other industry experts my knowledge is lacking in other technologies and techniques. Laser sintering was a big deal when we found as a college about firms that could do it as it allows geometries this small scale where a CNC mill on campus won’t. You however have EDM which is superior in surface finish.

Im definitely not an industry expert. Very far from it.

I’m talking about an actual machining course or two. That sounds more like a “machining 101”, if that. Just having a tour of a shop and pressing program start isn’t going to help.

I’m not saying I expect every engineer to be a machinist, but running a few parts you haven’t designed (and a few you have), will open your eyes to more efficient design and help design parts that aren’t ridiculous and unnecessary.

Everything looks awesome in CAD until you realize you’re going to have to do some unnecessarily creative fixture work or hold insane tolerances on parts that don’t need them. Being good to the people making your parts pays off when you really do need something advanced cut.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

The 4MHz offset fox hunt attenuator should get here next week. Telemini V3 seems to last for 5-6 hours at pad mode. It has 3750, 4000, or 4250 frequency rate options. At 3750 setting it beeps every ten seconds while at 4250 setting it beeps at every five seconds just playing with it. The signal meter on the Yaseu VX-6R is just pegged full right in neighborhoods making it useless up close. I even tried onboard Yaseu attenuation to no avail. I wasn’t hearing any volume changes or seeing signal strength changes today. It seems to transmit through interior housing walls just fine. Despite having a HAM ticket I’m completely new at RDF for rocketry. It would help if the beacon was nearly constant, but it seems to pulse in pad mode. Don’t know if that’s normal or not.

 

[kyle]

The 4MHz offset fox hunt attenuator should get here next week. Telemini V3 seems to last for 5-6 hours at pad mode. It has 3750, 4000, or 4250 frequency rate options. At 3750 setting it beeps every ten seconds while at 4250 setting it beeps at every five seconds just playing with it. The signal meter on the Yaseu VX-6R is just pegged full right in neighborhoods making it useless up close. I even tried onboard Yaseu attenuation to no avail. I wasn’t hearing any volume changes or seeing signal strength changes today. It seems to transmit through interior housing walls just fine. Despite having a HAM ticket I’m completely new at RDF for rocketry. It would help if the beacon was nearly constant, but it seems to pulse in pad mode. Don’t know if that’s normal or not.

You're the expert at everything, tell us what's wrong.

If this is a subtle cry for help (I think "yes") good luck. Hopefully there's someone you haven't annoyed enough to ignore your plea.

Have you read the instructions, or is that below your genius intellect level?

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Too close to signal source, TeleminiV3, needs more attenuation, and possibly needs to be in actual flight/landing mode for radio beacon to activate. Not certain if the pad pulses are telemetry data and not a beacon. Possible too much ground clutter housings.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

This is what I find in the manual. It doesn’t walk you through using the radio beacon. It assumes you already know that. When you configure altimeter on a Telemini it looks different on settings you see than what manual shows.

 

[watheyak]

Keith and Bdale left out the section on social cognition? Pity.

 

[KC3KNM]

Keith and Bdale left out the section on social cognition? Pity.

At least he edited the part about the manual being a “POS”.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

It has lots of data in some sections then suddenly very sparse in others. The TeleGPS and Mega are the most documented products and are easier to use out of the box in my opinion here. I’m sure once I figure out Telemini V3 I’ll be happier with it. This KeithP Guy on the forum had to answer technical questions about RDF on TeleMega activates in pad mode. I asked for clarification on the Telemini. As of now I am assuming the beacon is the pulsing tone I’m hearing once on pad mode. Ugh.

 

[Rainmaker]

What he said.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Drilled a pressure relief hole tonight. Still waiting on that attenuator.

 

[OverTheTop]

I don't know if you had any rough edges (loose strands of cf) on the hole when you drilled it, but you can fix that by applying CA glue and redrilling after it sets. That gets rid of the furries if you have them.