> its maiden flight due to ejection blow-by in a brand new Dr. Rocket
> 38/720 motor.
I doubt it was related to the "brand" of casing.
> 1) Phenolic tubing cracked, badly bubbled and crimped at angle on one
> side at forward end.
> 2) No apparent damage to motor case or closures.
> 3) delay o-ring, sleeve and spacer vaporized.
> 4) metal forward spacer/o-ring undamaged
This is standard fare for post blow-by damage.
The motor burns at lower than designed pressure for longer than designed time.
> There were no apparent problems on assembly
Also not surprising as blow-by is an inherent design flaw in the RMS system.
> Although I am not by any means blaming the Dr. Rocket motor, I had a very
> successful (albeit somewhat controversial <g>) flight three weeks ago on
> a J350 in an AT motor.
RMS is over 70% reliable even accounting for "so-called" operator error,
which as you know would not be possible if it were designed to
> Comments, speculation invited. Flaming will be quickly and severely
I do not deserve punishment.
> DOUG GILMORE
> TRA #4666 level 2
TRA #12. Is that something close to level 2?
"Cannot find REALITY.SYS. Universe halted."
Box 1242, Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.