I'll be there too. I'll watch for it.At LDRS in the summer. I might fly it on some D's before that though.
I'll be there too. I'll watch for it.At LDRS in the summer. I might fly it on some D's before that though.
Planning on flying on D's and E's until LDRS, when I will shoot it on the F44, and if it doesn't reach mach, I will buy a casing and fly it on a G.
Get the CTI 6G case!At LDRS in the summer. I might fly it on some D's before that though.
Get the CTI 6G case!
Use the 24mm adapter it comes with29 mm, not 24
I will be using a Flightsketch mini in the AV bay.By the way, how will you tell if your rocket breaks mach?
Point taken. But the plan is a min diameter 24, and min diameter is indeed a good idea. (Apogee's recommended motor for supersonic flight is a 29 mm G.)Use the 24mm adapter it comes with
Cesaroni G145 6 grain 24mm. That should get you supersonic. Haven't simmed it, but maybe? Long burn is for altitude.
160+ G is pretty sporty... All of the 24mm 6G motors come with ejection charges, so you could use motor ejection and not an altimeter if you chose. What do the G65 white longburn and the G117 white get you in terms of speed? They would be a little less of a kick in the rear.Point. Going to need an ejection altimeter though, since it doesn't have any ejection charge. But wildman does sell it (I just set the recovery to come out at apogee)
View attachment 502471
Just seems like this would totally shred the rocket.
View attachment 502475
https://wildmanrocketry.com/collections/24mm-6-grain/products/pr24-6g-pPoint taken. But the plan is a min diameter 24, and min diameter is indeed a good idea. (Apogee's recommended motor for supersonic flight is a 29 mm G.)
The g65 specifically almost never has enough delay for reasonable motor eject in a minimum diameter situation.160+ G is pretty sporty... All of the 24mm 6G motors come with ejection charges, so you could use motor ejection and not an altimeter if you chose. What do the G65 white longburn and the G117 white get you in terms of speed? They would be a little less of a kick in the rear.
The G145, by your sim, puts you at mach 1.7, way past transonic. Airframe integrity may be an issue. I bought the 6 grain 24mm to use in a Mach1 BT60 Rim 66. Haven't had the urge to test it that way yet.
I will be using a Flightsketch mini in the AV bay.
From ThrustCurve.org, there are four current motors that more or less fit the above criteria:I would try to find a G motor around the G55 spec if they make them, or a higher average thrust F.
Would certainly get the job done.All this talk about old school motors has me thinking I should try to break mach on a minimum diameter 18mm F55 motor
; Aerotech F55 Data from data insert
F55 18 138 4-8-12 0.024000 0.034650 AT
0.025 88.846
0.05 89.295
0.075 89.744
0.1 89.744
0.15 90.641
0.2 91.090
0.25 91.987
0.3 91.090
0.35 90.192
0.4 89.295
0.45 85.256
0.5 76.282
0.525 67.308
0.55 53.846
0.575 40.385
0.6 26.923
0.625 22.436
0.65 17.949
0.675 13.462
0.7 9.423
0.725 8.974
0.75 7.179
0.775 5.385
0.8 4.487
0.825 4.038
0.85 2.692
0.875 0.897
0.9 0.000
;
No, I'm going to use Quick & ThickNice!
Do you plan on using epoxy clay fillets?
ThrustCurve reports no 18 mm F engines, in production or not. Also no E engines. The best candidate in 18 mm would be the AT D21T. And even though ThrustCurve says it's in production, it doesn't seem to actually be available. (I think I have one.)
This does not surprise me at all.Somewhere on TRF is the story of how Scott Pearce and I came up with the 18mm E45/F55 and 24mm G42 motors.
The whole process was "Mostly Harmless".
In a minimum diameter/minimum mass rocket the E45/F55 could exceed Mach 1.
Our speed trials with these motors did not return usable data.
However, a rocket powered by a 18mm D21 motor was confirmed to pass the Speed of Sound (Mach 1.016).
Enter your email address to join: