Mars Snooper Upscale

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Bill Ellic » Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:22:22



Okay fellow rocketeers, I'm getting pretty bored with all the rant and rave
posts here.  I just want to build rockets!

I'm toying with the idea of building a BIG Mars Snooper.  I have been
sitting here looking at my estes original that I built back in the sixties.
I really need to paint it someday:) and I was thinking of building one with
a 98mm 1st stage motor and a 75mm (or 54mm 2nd stage).  I think it would
also be pretty cool to use 3 54mm motors in the pods if possible.
Possibly use the 54's (or go to 75mm in the pods) to get it in the air, then
light the 98 and then the 2nd stage.

Any of you "Engineer" inclined types out there up to a real design
challenge?  I'm not in any hurry on this, since this is a fairly complex and
expensive project.  I just think it would look fantastic to be able to
launch a bird like this.  I really need some input on the structural
problems involved as well as electronic and recovery ideas.

All ideas and serious replies will be considered.

Thanks in advance

Bill Ellick

Yea I am a TRA and NAR member, but lets face it - this is going to be one
heck of an experimental !

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Wedge Oldha » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:25:20


I think putting motors in the pods would be marginal at best. The pods are
very far from the centerline, and any thrust imbalance would push the rocket
from vertical.  If the motors in the pods were canted to point at the C/G
that would be a big help. But again IMHO putting engines in the pods is
asking for trouble. It's just bad ju-ju.

Wedge Oldham
http://BlackBrant2.com


Quote:
> Okay fellow rocketeers, I'm getting pretty bored with all the rant and
rave
> posts here.  I just want to build rockets!

> I'm toying with the idea of building a BIG Mars Snooper.  I have been
> sitting here looking at my estes original that I built back in the
sixties.
> I really need to paint it someday:) and I was thinking of building one
with
> a 98mm 1st stage motor and a 75mm (or 54mm 2nd stage).  I think it would
> also be pretty cool to use 3 54mm motors in the pods if possible.
> Possibly use the 54's (or go to 75mm in the pods) to get it in the air,
then
> light the 98 and then the 2nd stage.

> Any of you "Engineer" inclined types out there up to a real design
> challenge?  I'm not in any hurry on this, since this is a fairly complex
and
> expensive project.  I just think it would look fantastic to be able to
> launch a bird like this.  I really need some input on the structural
> problems involved as well as electronic and recovery ideas.

> All ideas and serious replies will be considered.

> Thanks in advance

> Bill Ellick

> Yea I am a TRA and NAR member, but lets face it - this is going to be one
> heck of an experimental !


 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Jerry Irvin » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:31:43




Quote:
> I think putting motors in the pods would be marginal at best. The pods are
> very far from the centerline, and any thrust imbalance would push the rocket
> from vertical.  If the motors in the pods were canted to point at the C/G
> that would be a big help. But again IMHO putting engines in the pods is
> asking for trouble. It's just bad ju-ju.

> Wedge Oldham
> http://BlackBrant2.com

However if you used CTI insta-ignite motors it might very well work
better than any other combination might.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email.

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by zoot » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 01:04:26


On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:25:20 -0800, "Wedge Oldham"

Quote:

>I think putting motors in the pods would be marginal at best. The pods are
>very far from the centerline, and any thrust imbalance would push the rocket
>from vertical.  If the motors in the pods were canted to point at the C/G
>that would be a big help. But again IMHO putting engines in the pods is
>asking for trouble. It's just bad ju-ju.

<Homer Simpson>
Mmmm...bad ju-ju....
<drool>
</Homer Simpson>

Zooty

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Dale Marti » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:09:48


Bill,
Talk about ambitious OMG the possibilities though.  The use of the pods is
not an easy one to work out as any slight off of alignment could cause
catastrophic failure and a LOOK OUT from all.  I have tried this on a
24/18mm
scale in past and was not to successful but I kinda slapped it together in a
weekend too.  I wish you the best in this and let us know where and when the
launch is.  Gotta see this one go.

--
Dale Martin
NAR 80678 L2
N0JFM

Quote:
> Okay fellow rocketeers, I'm getting pretty bored with all the rant and
rave
> posts here.  I just want to build rockets!

> I'm toying with the idea of building a BIG Mars Snooper.  I have been
> sitting here looking at my estes original that I built back in the
sixties.
> I really need to paint it someday:) and I was thinking of building one
with
> a 98mm 1st stage motor and a 75mm (or 54mm 2nd stage).  I think it would
> also be pretty cool to use 3 54mm motors in the pods if possible.
> Possibly use the 54's (or go to 75mm in the pods) to get it in the air,
then
> light the 98 and then the 2nd stage.

> Any of you "Engineer" inclined types out there up to a real design
> challenge?  I'm not in any hurry on this, since this is a fairly complex
and
> expensive project.  I just think it would look fantastic to be able to
> launch a bird like this.  I really need some input on the structural
> problems involved as well as electronic and recovery ideas.

> All ideas and serious replies will be considered.

> Thanks in advance

> Bill Ellick

> Yea I am a TRA and NAR member, but lets face it - this is going to be one
> heck of an experimental !

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Jerry Irvin » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 06:22:30




Quote:
> Bill,
> Talk about ambitious OMG the possibilities though.  The use of the pods is
> not an easy one to work out as any slight off of alignment could cause
> catastrophic failure and a LOOK OUT from all.  I have tried this on a
> 24/18mm
> scale in past and was not to successful but I kinda slapped it together in a
> weekend too.  I wish you the best in this and let us know where and when the
> launch is.  Gotta see this one go.

http://www.v-serv.com/usr/kits/sentra_srb.htm

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email.

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Ismaeel Abdur-Rashee » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 14:02:06


Quote:

> I think putting motors in the pods would be marginal at best. The pods are
> very far from the centerline, and any thrust imbalance would push the rocket
> from vertical.  If the motors in the pods were canted to point at the C/G
> that would be a big help. But again IMHO putting engines in the pods is
> asking for trouble. It's just bad ju-ju.

this may sound absurd, but suppose the engine was actually internalized,
with the thrust ducted to the pods

haven't seen anything like that at LDRS!

it would handle the balance issue

- iz

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Jerry Irvin » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:07:52




Quote:

> > I think putting motors in the pods would be marginal at best. The pods are
> > very far from the centerline, and any thrust imbalance would push the rocket
> > from vertical.  If the motors in the pods were canted to point at the C/G
> > that would be a big help. But again IMHO putting engines in the pods is
> > asking for trouble. It's just bad ju-ju.

> this may sound absurd, but suppose the engine was actually internalized,
> with the thrust ducted to the pods

> haven't seen anything like that at LDRS!

> it would handle the balance issue

> - iz

I would LOVE to see all three pods burn off from 6000 degree ducted
fluid flow :)

And that was tech Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email.

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Wedge Oldha » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:45:10


I wouldn't do it, and I wouldn't RSO any rocket that did.
Wedge Oldham
http://BlackBrant2.com


Quote:
> this may sound absurd, but suppose the engine was actually internalized,
> with the thrust ducted to the pods

> haven't seen anything like that at LDRS!

> it would handle the balance issue

> - iz

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Kurt Kesle » Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:53:13



says...
Quote:
> I wouldn't do it, and I wouldn't RSO any rocket that did.
> Wedge Oldham
> http://BlackBrant2.com

C'mon, Wedge.  That show alone might be worth the price of admission.
;-)

--
Kurt Kesler

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Jerry Irvin » Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:16:02




Quote:

> says...
> > I wouldn't do it, and I wouldn't RSO any rocket that did.
> > Wedge Oldham
> > http://BlackBrant2.com

> C'mon, Wedge.  That show alone might be worth the price of admission.
> ;-)

The safety code protects you from wacky ideas like this. Rejecting it at
the RSO table is just silly.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email.

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Bill Ellic » Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:22:59


Heck, I might as well just put all the parts in a pile and set fire to them
now rather than try that.  I have been playing with the stress factors
involved with trying to use power in the pods, as well as the alignment
issues and have become fairly convinced that it would be too much trouble.
Now maybe using smoke canisters in the pods set off at 1st stage burnout
might give a very interesting effect wouldn't you think?
I really need to come up with something different for this bird if I am
going to spend this much money and time to build it.  Not that the
engineering for this as a 2 stage rocket isn't a project in itself!

Bill Ellick


Quote:
> I wouldn't do it, and I wouldn't RSO any rocket that did.
> Wedge Oldham
> http://BlackBrant2.com



> > this may sound absurd, but suppose the engine was actually internalized,
> > with the thrust ducted to the pods

> > haven't seen anything like that at LDRS!

> > it would handle the balance issue

> > - iz

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Jerry Irvin » Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:43:46




Quote:
> Heck, I might as well just put all the parts in a pile and set fire to them
> now rather than try that.  I have been playing with the stress factors
> involved with trying to use power in the pods, as well as the alignment
> issues and have become fairly convinced that it would be too much trouble.
> Now maybe using smoke canisters in the pods set off at 1st stage burnout
> might give a very interesting effect wouldn't you think?
> I really need to come up with something different for this bird if I am
> going to spend this much money and time to build it.  Not that the
> engineering for this as a 2 stage rocket isn't a project in itself!

Smoke pods or mere blackjacks since they are wimpy anyway.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email.

 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Colour Code » Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:45:56




Quote:
>The safety code protects you from wacky ideas like this.

Which safety code do you follow?
 
 
 

Mars Snooper Upscale

Post by Dave Grayvi » Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:18:05


Quote:



>>The safety code protects you from wacky ideas like this.

> Which safety code do you follow?

Didn't you know that jerry is "exempt" from the laws of man!